Russell Anway

Sadly no. I bid 2100 on the one I linked. I would have gone higher if I'd had more trust in the seller. To me it went for a little more than it is worth, it's close and often changing, but you have to draw the line somewhere. To get it in working condition it would be 500 for a pl, 160 for a focus ring, and another two hundred-ish for a CLA/collimation (from the people I'd have do the work). Add in shipping to Russia and NY two ways and it would be another 1000 over the sale price to get it working. It went for 2250 but would actually be roughly 3250 to use it, which is a fine price... But I bought an 80mm with pl and focus ring, from a reputable dealer, with test images to show its quality (which this seller would not provide), for under 3000 a few months ago. So to me it was a bit high. Someone selling expensive lenses but being unable to provide any images from them worries me. Some of these old lenses cant produce a good image, and the only way to know is to look through one, so it can be convenient to hide behind "I don't have the right camera to test it." That's not an accusation here, but that guarantee is worth money to me. The brassy one was the best of the bunch to me, but the seller listed it as an oct (???) but when I pressed him he said it was a rodina mount, not an OCT of any sort (and only told me at the last minute). These lenses can also be converted but are bulkier than the oct-19 variety, and can't be used with an adapter. But the thing that concerned me was that he was claiming ignorance but actually knew exactly what it was. The other thing is that I'm suspicious that the other mono-block 50mm he listed is actually a 75mm (it just looked too long), but I couldn't figure out the numbers on the front conclusively. Dima at conversiontopl.com told me he could convert my 35mm two piece into a single lens with a pl and focus ring for 750 (I bought my 80mm from him and he has been very trustworthy in our dealings). I think some other people convert them or re-house them but I don't have any other names (except Sergey, but he's fallen into disrepute). The catch is that after the conversion the lens still needs rails. But that's probably a conversation for another thread... (But one well worth starting!) Trying to piece a set of these together is definitely a challenge, but I think you still have to be choosy. Hope the winners got something good though!

I agree the 50mm's are confusing. I'm not convinced all the information in all of those listings is correct and I'm having a hard time making sense of all of the markings so I can't concretely confirm my suspicions. I too feel like I saw a document once that clearly outlined a lot of this stuff but can't find it right now. I can say with reasonable certainty that the first two numbers in the serial numbers are the year they were made, which would make the 35mm's from 1981 and 1871 respectively. The general consensus is that condition is much more important than age (mine is from 67 but makes a sharp image at T4, so go figure). These look to be in really good condition if the pictures are to be believed, and you can have them converted to monoblock with a PL and a focus ring for about 750. So that seems pretty reasonable if everything is on the up and up. I'm having a hard time parsing the numbers on the 50's though. So nothing useful for me!

Saw this one come up recently: http://www.ebay.com/itm/50mm-LOMO-anamorphic-camera-lens-square-front-/201176337425?pt=Camera_Lenses&hash=item2ed70b4c11 Can anyone positively ID this as oct-18? It doesn't seem to be an OCT-19 but it does look like its a mono-block lens. Is that bulky spot around the middle some sort of mod? Any idea where the mod might have been done? It doesn't look like my oct-19 80mm, but I'm still looking for a mono-block 50mm so if I'm mistaken I'd like to know. The seller has listed it listed as "OCT (????)" which worries me, since she doesn't seem to know anything about it and you can't hold the seller to the claim if things go bad. Anyone know anything?

I'm making a similar decision. Based purely on specs... My thinking is that the A7s makes the most sense. I've been shooting my anamorphics on a Gh1 for a while. My widest lens is a 35mm. And I can say with confidence that it would be nice to go a little wider than the gh1 sensor allows. The A7s is full frame but it offers a crop sensor mode. That is some best-of-both-worlds-shit! Togglin' willy-nilly between FF and super35. That means that I can shoot aps-c mode using my ana's (which won't cover FF), then switch it to full frame and shoot my zeiss zf's. Awesome. The larger sensor also means its going to be easier to soften up the background and make the most of that beautiful bokeh. Lastly, to me it comes down to 4k vs. low-light. This is definitely subjective and depends on what you shoot/what you need. But to me, because shooting the anamorphics is important, low-light takes precedence. Having that type of low-light performance means I can pop on my 80mm ana, stop it down to T5.6 and shoot at night. This camera means there are scripts I'm not re-writing. That is so amazingly great. I've always been a canon shooter (there's an XL2 bangin' around here somewhere...) but for my purposes the 5DIII is not a contender. It is technologically dwarfed by the GH4, sensor size means it doesn't work with proper cinema glass, and doesn't have anywhere near the flexibility of the A7s in terms of glass options or low-light performance. I'm sure the ML software brings it's picture quality back into the ballpark with these other cameras (haven't used it, don't really know, only shot MKII's) but when there are affordable, warranty-supported alternatives I just don't see the point. Plus dealing with wonky home-brewed workflows? Sounds like a headache. Then throw in sLog...

Thanks! They are a it of a bear to work with. The flip side however is that you really have to plan in advance. This was shot in three shoots. I had 45 minutes in the dance studio, three hours in the park, and three hours in the music studio including lighting time. It was tight but since I boarded it up in advance it wasn't hectic. I even knew which shots would need which filters before we shot a frame. The biggest thing was only changing lenses once per location since it's so time consuming. It was definitely more work, but if I'd been shooting some spherical zooms I don't think I would have felt the need to put as much work into my pre-production. And I think the final would have suffered. Also, a good friend of mine who is a musician did original music for it. He's better than good and played on a track on the Walter Mitty soundtrack last year. So that helps :)

That is basically what we're getting at. "is it worth it?" Some achromat's are worth it others *might not be. We don't know. I can tell you that we do some macro work with diopters at the studio that I work at and we get some nasty color fringing. I'm not sure which brand they're using, but its not achromatic, meanwhile I've liked the results from my Tiffen series 9's. It's explained in depth and better some other places, but the basic thinking behind using achromat's with anamorphics is this... An anamorphic lens of any kind is essentially an adapter, same as a diopter. There are a number of problems caused by using each of them in common. Achromatic diopters work to correct those short comings in close photography, but in doing they inadvertantly correct those same flaws in anamorphic photography. Giving sharper less distorted images (undesireable distortion that is). So you see the point of using achromats on anamorphics often has nothing to do with close photography (though they go well together because you so often use diopters precisely for close-ups when shooting anamorphic). That's why the low power diopters are popular, such as the tokina +.4 (and now, potentially, the SLR magic +.33). But as to whether or not the SLR magic diopters are "worth it." That's what I'm asking. They're new so there isn't a lot of information or quality tests available yet. So get shooting and post something!

Hello, There are far too many tests shot with our anamorphics and far too little work! And in that spirit I shot a couple narrative bits with my Lomos in the last couple weeks. I shot this with my 35mm and 80mm Mostly with the 35mm. The 35mm is an OCT 18 so I also mounted it with a 24mm and a 50mm at times. Opening shot is 24mm, shots on suspension bridge are 50mm. Shot on a gh1 (frowny face) and had an arri 650. I also wrote it and directed it. First time I've done an ad like this or shot something significant with these lenses. I used Schneider 4x4 ND's, a tiffen polarizer, and a tiffen +1.5 diopter (closeups to throw that background out of focus). It's an ad for a new app coming out Saturday. It uses iPhone gps data, and other ambient factors like time/temp to access original artistic content. So it's a bit like a gallery/scavenger hunt on your phone. Only available in Minneapolis to at launch. I also recently shot a short I will hopefully post here when I make sure it won't cause any problems with upcoming festival commitments. Thanks and let me know what you think!

Firstly... Don't sell yourself short!!!!! If you are working steadily, doing theatre, multi-cam and dance, you are doing better than a lot of people! This is my busiest weekend in forever and I'm doing three dance pieces, and two other shoots. A dance concert was my first job ever and it's still keeping the lights on! My honest advice would be.... dum dum dum... Make sure your traditional kit is in order before you look at anamorphics. Make sure you have a good wide, and a good fifty (Primes, you are right! They are for ballers only!) A tokina 11-16, a 24/28mm prime and a 50mm prime should let you shoot almost anything (nikon, canon, zeiss leica...). There is also an old nikon 35-70 2.8 which is dirt cheep if you need a zoom for run-and-gun. Then, when that is all in order and you want an anamorphic... get a 35mm lomo squarefront. I know I am in the minority opinion here.... but.... you are going to spend 500-800 on a good adapter or projection lens. The new SLR magic adapter is 900 (there abouts...) and none of the adapters can rack focus. Meanwhile a 35mm squarefront anamorphic will cost you between 1400 - 2000 for an oct-18 mount lens. I spent 1650 and not that long ago. This point is delicate, but... I'm going to be honest now about what I see in the market... The sankor's have a cool look, and for various pet projects they can be useful and fun... but you are never going to recoup your expense. You will be begging friends to rig lights and act and that is AWESOME but you will not be able to refund the expense on that piece of equipment through rentals. Period. My personal -- loaded with grains of salt, individual perspective -- would be to spend an extra 600-1000 dollars and get a professional cinema lens that will go up in price FOREVER. And when you add in the cost of clamps/ND filters/diopters (though, diopters will be needed with proper anamorphics as well) the margin of expense grows thinner. BUT the beauty of a 35mm OCT-18 anamorphic is that not only will you get a rackable 35mm cinema lens, but you will also be able to detach the front element, mount it to rails, and align your camera with a 24, 50, 90, 100mm prime lens and get the full range of focal lengths just as you would with a Sankor adapter. But should you decide to proceed with your set you already have the first piece in your anamorphic set. And in a set of anamorphic lenses, the 35mm or 40mm will be the workhorse, even if you have five lenses you'll still spend half your time with your 35 or 40. Don't believe me? Watch "Rushmore," I don't think they ever took the 40m off! That will be your moneymaker, your honeyhouse, your joi'de beeve (don't speak french :) Other poeple can (and will) disagree with me. But before you make a decision, remember, the lomo lens flare is CLASSIC CLASSIC CLASSIC! If you don't believe me, watch the "Guardians of the Galaxy" teaser and tell me where you've seen that (CG) lens flare before... Hmm... must'a been somewhere.... The downside is that Lomo's are rare, and it will take some time to nab one for a decent price. I've been watching the web carefully for about 18 months and have happily found a 35mm and an 80mm. If you're in a rush it might not be the right way to go, but I am VERY happy with the path I've taken! Cheers! And mostly importantly shoot something cool! The artist will always be more important than the lens! And all my love to all the ana shooters!

Get one made... I hope that doesn't sound dismissive, but I've literally never seen one for sale. And if i sold you one, I'd need one... I'd imagine most people with any sort of access are in the same boat. Also, frankly. i'm not sure a leather and velvet lens cover that's fourty years old is even a good idea. Every time i look at my 35mm I'm terrified that there is mold lurking in that skanky old lens cover, then fearfully pack it with more dessicant.

I just realized you're the one who was selling the set of tiffen series 9 diopters on Ebay! I should have bought those.... Sad face. Now I'm piecing a set together and it'll cost at least twice that. But seriously, has anyone tried out the SLR magic acrhomat diopters yet! HELP! If they are even a small upgrade over the tiffen series 9 I would buy a set for sure. My fear is that they'll soften (which is the complaint of the adorama review). I love the look of my lomos but I don't want to go any softer than they already are. By the way, the tiffen series 9 and schneider series 9 diopters are not doublets right? Just looking at it in my hand it seems to be one piece (tiffen), but I'm not sure. I know schneider makes a set of large doublet diopters but they are prohibitively expensive, at least for the moment.

Has anyone used the new SLR magic achromatic diopters? Most people posting about them are using them with the anamorphot and that is not my interest, I want to use them with my Lomo squarefronts. The only review I found of them is one on adorama that is 1-star and says they're trash. But that really isn't much to go on. Any consensus yet?